“The Republican strategy of lawsuits and approaching impeachment is fundamentally misfiring,” the New York Democrat said at a breakfast organized by the Christian Science Monitor. “It’s amassing resources for us.”
Since Speaker John A. Boehner announced a possible lawsuit against Obama, the DCCC has brought in $7.6 million online, including contributions from 74,000 new donors, Israel said. The average contribution was $19.

These donations under $200 amassed to $51 million for the DCCC this cycle, while the National Republican Congressional Committee raised $18 million from the same small contributions, Israel said.

Israel added that the threats of impeachment and lawsuits also ignites his party’s large-dollar donors.

“John Boehner makes the case for us. Darrell Issa makes the case for us,” Israel said for donors the committee dubs as “Majority Makers. “Issa, Beohner, they technically qualify as ‘Majority Makers’ because every time they talk about impeachment and don’t take it off the table … that just ignites our donors.”

On Tuesday morning, Boehner told reporters at a news conference on Capitol Hill that the impeachment talk was fabricated by Democrats for the exact purpose of raising funds. Incoming House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., said on Fox News this weekend that House Republicans wouldn’t take impeachment off the table.

“We have no plans to impeach the president. We have no future plans. It’s all a scam started by Democrats in the White House,” Boehner said.

“Bottom line, Greg, God bless him, he can predict” a wave, Isreal said. “My job is to prepare, and on the things that are in our control — messaging, mobilization, money — we are firing on all cylinders and we are succeeding.”

If you ask me–www.washingtonspectacle.com–that is
one of the most ridiculous questions making the rounds of the TV politico-chat
fests these days. That question is everywhere, as if things are so bad in this
country that the only logical questions is: when, in our history, did we do so
much better, when was our judgment so much better tuned to the times?

Washington? Check. Lincoln? Check? Reagan? Check, if
you sit on the right side of the national divide. Clinton? Check if you sit on
the left side of the national divide? Obama? This is probably a bad time to
ask.

But that’s the problem, and that’s why the question
is totally irrelevant. The times are the times, and the times are special to
the times. One era’s president is another era’s disaster. If you take one of
these supposedly great presidents and give them a whole other set of problems,
their reactions might be altogether unsatisfactory. Wars, technology,
culture–they all change with the times and presidents react to the times
they’re serving in, and also to the people they served. Opinions change,
outlooks change, politics certainly changes. We need to start looking at
presidents in the context of their times and stop wondering what it would be
like if they were still around to steer the wobbly ship of state.

It wouldn’t be that surprising to find that one of
those “great” presidents from a hundred years ago would today be attacked and reviled
for being ineffectual, confused, do-nothing, do too-much, socialist, communist,
fascist etc.

President Obama, anyone?

http://washingtonspectacle.com Robert Price Rifkin

So…

Who was America’s Best President

If you ask me–www.washingtonspectacle.com–that is
one of the most ridiculous questions making the rounds of the TV politico-chat
fests these days. That question is everywhere, as if things are so bad in this
country that the only logical questions is: when, in our history, did we do so
much better, when was our judgment so much better tuned to the times?

Washington? Check. Lincoln? Check? Reagan? Check, if
you sit on the right side of the national divide. Clinton? Check if you sit on
the left side of the national divide? Obama? This is probably a bad time to
ask.

But that’s the problem, and that’s why the question
is totally irrelevant. The times are the times, and the times are special to
the times. One era’s president is another era’s disaster. If you take one of
these supposedly great presidents and give them a whole other set of problems,
their reactions might be altogether unsatisfactory. Wars, technology,
culture–they all change with the times and presidents react to the times
they’re serving in, and also to the people they served. Opinions change,
outlooks change, politics certainly changes. We need to start looking at
presidents in the context of their times and stop wondering what it would be
like if they were still around to steer the wobbly ship of state.

It wouldn’t be that surprising to find that one of
those “great” presidents from a hundred years ago would today be attacked and reviled
for being ineffectual, confused, do-nothing, do too-much, socialist, communist,
fascist etc.

President Obama, anyone?

Layla

President Obama has destroyed this country and will be held responsible for his own legacy.

smb11

How has he destroyed this country?
By waging two wars of choice without funding either one?
By cutting taxes during a time of war?
By making America a country which tortures people?
By sweeping up people without any proof of their being terrorists and holding them indefinitely?
By creating more terrorists as a result of the actions taken above?
It wasn’t Obama who did all this.

adamrussell

Republicans claim that no president has overreached his authority like Obama did with the employer mandate. But Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation went WAY further, and that was an executive action.